mlpfanartfandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Workshop
There is an unwritten, but very sensible rule not to edit other users' user pages, including sandboxes and the like, without their permission. This wiki has a habit of moving both material that is not suitable for the main namespace to user sandboxes as well as material that is theoretically suitable, but not quite there yet in terms of content. I'm proposing Project:Workshop for the latter. Instead of moving currently unsuitable pages to the userspace of the user who created them, they would be moved to a subpage of Project:Workshop where they would automatically be editable by anyone. The project page would contain an index of such pages. Eligible ones off the top of my head include Fleur de Lis, Queen Chrysalis, Braeburn, WillDrawForFood1. Their current main namespace pages would not be deleted, but would redirect to the workshop page to ensure that duplicates aren't created. So the pages aren't lost, but the main namespace stays "clean". The move would be done at administrator discretion (except for pages which are currently already on the user namespace, where permission has to be asked). The option is not open for pages which aren't just too short, but violate other guidelines (so no OC's, roleplay, and the like). Very short pages which contain nothing usable or only images are also not eligible and may be marked for deletion in the usual manner. When a page has made enough progress to at least be considered a stub, it can be moved to the main namespace, becoming a "proper" article. If, after a period of time (longer than the usual deletion window), there is no movement whatsoever on a Workshop page, it may be deleted after all so as not to encourage the creation of article fragments. While that isn't the intention, the Workshop may also be a way to get rid of most of the gallery-only pages which were grandfathered in (though probably not Spike because of the amount of images on there; definitely Twist and Cheerilee, though), as well as some stubs that aren't really even that (like Zecora). I'm not a purity fanatic for the main namespace, or anything, but I don't think it serves the wiki well to have established certain standards of what a page should be while undermining those standards with old pages which violate them. The policy can be revisited when/if the wiki has a larger userbase. --Tulipclaymore 16:58-17:09, April 25, 2012 (UTC) This page would be another example where instead of a deletion notice, a "not currently good enough, but you'll get there in time" notice might be more motivational. --Tulipclaymore 07:14, April 26, 2012 (UTC) I constructed a template. It would look like this on the main namespace and like this on a Workshop page proper (except at the top, naturally). --Tulipclaymore 19:30, April 26, 2012 (UTC) :Looks like a good idea to me. Yeah, I think that would speed up the process of getting articles for those grandfathered in pages written. And it would be a good way to determine whether pages really are main namespace worthy, or if there's only enough information to be incorporated into some kind of hub page. -- This is Jonny Manz, signing 00:14, April 28, 2012 (UTC)